GOP battle plan: If you can’t compete, cheat

Taking its cue from the likes of Lance Armstrong, dozens of Atlanta Public School teachers and Bernie Madoff, the Republican Party is embracing a bold new solution to its political problems:

If you can’t compete, cheat.

And cheat big.

In Virginia, for example, Barack Obama has carried the state and its 13 electoral votes in the last two elections, becoming the first Democrat to carry the state back-to-back since Franklin Roosevelt. But rather than work harder to win back the state, or adopt policies more relevant to the needs of its voters, Republicans are advancing another solution.

Under a bill passed out of a state Senate subcommittee this week, Virginia would no longer award its electoral votes to the candidate who won the most votes. Instead, the state’s electoral votes would be allocated by congressional district, which are heavily gerrymandered to favor the GOP.*

Had the bill been law in November, Barack Obama would have been awarded just four of the state’s 13 electoral votes, even though he carried the state.

Mitt Romney, who lost the state, would have won nine electoral votes, more than twice as many as the winner. As one observer put it, Virginia is in the process of moving from a winner-takes-all system to a loser-takes-most system.

The bill now moves to a Senate committee, where Republicans hold a 10-5 advantage. It would then be voted on by the entire Senate, which is split 20-20 between the parties. A tie would be broken by the lieutenant governor, a Republican. Republicans control the Virginia House and governor’s office.

But as one GOP senator assured the Richmond Times-Dispatch, “There’s no partisan ax to grind here.”

Presumably, there is also no partisan ax-grinding underway in five other large states won by Obama, where Republicans are pushing similar legislation.

The scheme is so blatant in its election-stealing intent that it has pushed Larry Sabato, the well-known and nonpartisan elections expert at the University of Virginia, to condemn it in unusually harsh terms. The plan is “a corrupt and cynical maneuver to frustrate popular will and put a heavy thumb — the whole hand, in fact — on the scale for future Republican candidates.”

(BTW, the sheer gall of this effort adds credence to Democratic claims that the GOP has been trying to game the system in other ways, such as restricting access to the ballot box.)

The Republican Party faces a choice, Sabato writes. It can choose the Reaganesque, optimistic approach, “convinced that it can win the future by embracing it.” Or it can turn to a Nixonian attitude in which “it sees enemies everywhere, feels overwhelmed by electoral trends, and thinks it can win only by cheating, by subverting the system and stacking the deck in its favor.”

Sabato also cites the work of a colleague and fellow political scientist, Alan Abramovitz of Emory University, who has studied the potential impact of the GOP scheme. As Abramovitz notes, Obama won the popular vote, and thus the electoral votes, in Virginia, Ohio, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Florida and Wisconsin. In all six states, Republicans are eying passage of some version of the Virginia plan.

Had it been in place in 2012, Abramovitz concludes, the Virginia plan would have given Obama just 45 electoral votes in those states, while Romney would have reaped 61. And again, Obama carried all six states.

Abramovitz writes:

“Under current circumstances, the congressional district system could well result in a Republican victory even if the Democratic candidate were to win the popular vote by a substantial margin. Such a situation would undoubtedly lead to widespread questioning of the legitimacy of the election and, potentially, a public backlash against the victorious Republican candidate and the GOP itself. Before engaging in a cynical attempt to rig the electoral system, Republican leaders and strategists should consider the potential harm that their actions could do to our democratic form of government and to their own party.”

Once upon a time, such a scheme would have been unthinkable. Once upon a time, no major political party would have dared to be associated with it, because the bald-faced thievery is too obvious. Even Nixon would be appalled at the shamelessness of it all.

But in these times, Republican National Chairman Reince Priebus has publicly endorsed the election-stealing plan. “I think it’s something that a lot of states that have been consistently blue that are fully controlled red ought to be looking at,” he said this month.

Such is the desperation and moral bankruptcy of the party that he leads.

—-

*On Monday, Senate Republicans in Virginia took advantage of the fact that a Democratic colleague — a well-respected veteran of the civil rights movement — had traveled to Washington to attend the inauguration and for MLK Day observances. In his absence, they rushed through a surprise bill redrawing the state’s districts once again, to squeeze still further advantage from the system.

– Jay Bookman

443 comments Add your comment

Mick

January 25th, 2013
8:24 am

Dunce priebus, what a moron! The republican brand is about to become a toxic waste if they pursue this!!!

Keep Up the Good Fight!

January 25th, 2013
8:25 am

Republicans are for taxation without representation.

Doggone/GA

January 25th, 2013
8:25 am

“The republican brand is about to become a toxic waste if they pursue this!!!”

If it does pass and get signed, it will be interesting to see what happens in the next state elections

Jay

January 25th, 2013
8:26 am

I agree, Mick. I find it unbelievable that they are even attempting this.

But they are. They actually are.

TaxPayer

January 25th, 2013
8:26 am

Did you expect better from the party of lying, thieving, angry old misogynist white racists, Jay? Really? Surely you’ve seen enough of their actions to no longer be the least bit dismayed.

Granny Godzilla

January 25th, 2013
8:27 am

And is anyone in the least bit surprised?

Granny Godzilla

January 25th, 2013
8:29 am

Will this pass muster under the pre-clearance requirements of the votings rights act?.

Jay

January 25th, 2013
8:30 am

TaxPayer, I did expect better. I am honestly shocked that this has gotten as far as it has.

stands for decibels

January 25th, 2013
8:30 am

I find it unbelievable that they are even attempting this.

Welcome to America, where conservatives have been pulling this anti-representational democracy crap since its inception.

TaxPayer

January 25th, 2013
8:32 am

I personally cannot determine how low to put the bar for these Republicans.

kayaker 71

January 25th, 2013
8:33 am

“angry, old, misogynist white racists”?……. Certainly, you can come up with something more descriptive than that. How about hard working, self reliant, responsible patriots who don’t make excuses for their failures.

Jeff T

January 25th, 2013
8:33 am

Wow. And AJC wonders why they continue to lose subscribers with articles like this that only add the one side “liberal” instead of listing all the facts from both sides.

Nebraska and Maine ALREADY have a similar system in place to split the electoral votes.
“Once upon a time, such a scheme would have been unthinkable. Once upon a time, no major political party would have dared to be associated with it, because the bald-faced thievery is too obvious. Even Nixon would be appalled at the shamelessness of it all.”
Already being done. Yet you try to paint the picture of this happening the first time to cause confusion to enrage your readers against the GOP.

The government is broken. The rebublicans AND the democrats must take responsibility. Articles like this that polarize readers with partial facts just to prove a point only make matters worse.
If you consider yourself an honest man, you should truly be ashamed.

Should you wonder why many people feel the media is on the left and why less and less people believe what they read anymore??

indigo

January 25th, 2013
8:34 am

Can Georgia be far behind?

It seems to me this is not constitutional.

Jay, could this be challenged in Court?

Lord Help Us

January 25th, 2013
8:35 am

Desperation is ugly…

If anything, this will provide a short term ‘fix.’

It will only delay the reality that the GOP has a policy problem. Their policies have proven to be failures.

guy

January 25th, 2013
8:36 am

I have to agree. This is not going to work.

Vet

January 25th, 2013
8:37 am

All liberals like to assassinate character, demonize political opponents to cover up four years of decline and four more to come! Enjoy your for more years of Obama and stop worrying about Republicans! The Party is no more racist than you TaxPayer! Enjoy paying MORE taxes!

Thomas

January 25th, 2013
8:37 am

States with highest % of gun ownership. First- it is from the internet so it has to be right…. Second fully demonstrates it is really a Southern redneck problem (if Wyoming Alaska and Montana are indeed Southern). Please Charlie Rangel come save us from ourselves- we just a bunch of retards down here in the po’ south

1. Wyoming – 59.7%
2. Alaska – 57.8%
3. Montana – 57.7%
4. South Dakota – 56.6%
5. West Virginia – 55.4%
6. Mississippi – 55.3%
6. Idaho – 55.3%
6. Arkansas – 55.3%
9. Alabama – 51.7%
10. North Dakota – 50.7%

Skip

January 25th, 2013
8:37 am

Someone going to explain opinion to Jeff?

Doggone/GA

January 25th, 2013
8:37 am

“It seems to me this is not constitutional.”

The Constitution places no restrictions on how Electoral Votes are allocated. In fact, someone could win a state, and the Electoral Voters could STILL cast their votes for the opponent…even without such a law in place. There’s nothing in the Constitution that binds Electorl Voters to follow the voting in the election results.

stands for decibels

January 25th, 2013
8:38 am

As I’ve posted before, while not surprising (to me) in the least, what this really does is force rational people to waste time and resources taking extraordinary measures to fight this. The only way to fight it head on is through recall and referenda; otherwise, you have to wait it out and who knows how effed up and BS this Republic could turn out if we do that.

I’d like to think, for example, that the Democrats can field a Presidential candidate who can amass such an overwhelming majority of voters that the disenfranchisement efforts in OH/MI/VA/WI/PA will be for naught. I mean, if the Dems take TX, it’s game over, right? But what about 2020?

The only true workaround will be to somehow manage a Constitutional amendment to finally have a nationwide popular vote, something we should’ve done at least 150 years ago. And that’d be the mother of all battles, but it’s one we’ll have some day, anyway.

Keep Up the Good Fight!

January 25th, 2013
8:38 am

Al Gore has the decency to stand up and support Bush after the Florida nightmare for the good of the country.

Yet these same idiot Republicans have no concept that they are creating the “tyranny” that by implementing a system that will elect “Presidents” with a minority of the popular vote. Sickening.

Self-serving party interests first for the cons…..

kayaker 71

January 25th, 2013
8:38 am

Jeff T, 8:33,

More of Bookman’s telling only half of any story and omitting the part that makes liberals look bad. What more could you expect from a liberal “opinion maker”. Bookman represents nearly all of the biased media who thinks that intelligent people swallow this nonsense.

stands for decibels

January 25th, 2013
8:39 am

In fact, someone could win a state, and the Electoral Voters could STILL cast their votes for the opponent…

Yeah, those Founders were unalloyed geniuses. Which is why Original Intent uber Alles is such a cool way to go through one’s life.

not.

southpaw

January 25th, 2013
8:40 am

indigo @8:34
A court challenge would be doubtful. At least 2 other states (Maine and Nebraska, I think) do the same thing.

Jay, do you suppose those other states should change back to the winner-take-all system you suggest for Virginia?

F. Sinkwich

January 25th, 2013
8:41 am

Is anything here against the law?

Or does this action just hurt the lib ilk feelings?

TaxPayer

January 25th, 2013
8:42 am

The moral of the story in the Virginia Legislature is to never turn your back on a con. The cons there prefer a bowie knife in your back to a frontal assault with a rifle where you can at least see them coming. Virginia’s Republicans are truly cowards. How many more will follow in their footsteps.

stands for decibels

January 25th, 2013
8:43 am

Nebraska and Maine ALREADY have a similar system in place to split the electoral votes.

And they’ve been that way for ages; moreover, are dinky little states nobody cares about unless it’s super close.

too little time

January 25th, 2013
8:43 am

Sorry Jay, but each state gets to choose it’s own methods for electoral votes. It is not cheating any more than ANY redistricting is cheating by the party in power, and Democrats exclusively held that power in Georgia for nearly a hundred years without so much as a peep from Jay Bookman.

Jay

January 25th, 2013
8:44 am

Indigo, Georgia Republicans have no incentive to make this change, not as long as GOP presidential candidates continue to win the state under the current winner-take-all system.

As to lawsuits, I haven’t seen any expert analysis on it, but here’s my thought:

States are within their rights under the Constitution to allocate electoral votes as they wish, so a legal challenge on that basis would fail.

However, the gerrymandering of congressional districts raises another issue. Courts generally give legislators a lot of leeway in drawing districts, on the theory that they’re drawing lines for their own branch of the government. However, you could make a strong argument that by using gerrymandered districts to allocate presidential votes, you are giving far more weight to the votes of certain citizens than to others, thus running afoul of the concept of one-person, one-vote.

But again, it should never come down to that. This is just a stupid idea.

skipper

January 25th, 2013
8:44 am

Anybody who saw the gerrymandered district that first put Cybthia McKinney in office the first time (way back) knows that gerrymandering is not limited to one party. It was a long snake-like district that linked folks in parts of this place and parts of that that made no sense.
Independents………common sense! Both parties……..too extreme!

Keep Up the Good Fight!

January 25th, 2013
8:44 am

May not be able to address EC issues with court challenges but likely to see a lot more litigation on gerrymandering.

Darwin

January 25th, 2013
8:44 am

Just add this to the “if you can’t win impeach the guy” move.

stands for decibels

January 25th, 2013
8:44 am

The moral of the story in the Virginia Legislature is to never turn your back on a con.

Yes. I quoted Joe Strummer of the Clash on this, the other day: “Because killers in America work seven days a week.”

Peadawg

January 25th, 2013
8:44 am

I know it’s not going to happen but the BEST thing would be to do away with the electoral college all together and just go by the popular vote.

Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)

January 25th, 2013
8:45 am

Well, things is looking up. I’m sick and tired of seeing the librul Democrats put in librul policies just because they got the most votes. But don’t get me wrong. I think the Republicans ought to be made to get at least 25 percent of the votes before their canadates get elected. We are not a Communist country, after all. We’ll call it the Enlightened 25 Percenters.

The rest of the country can catch up after we get into office.

But I don’t want it to work the other way. Here in GA we shouldn’t let the librul Democrats get any electoral votes just because there’s a couple districts that vote for librul Democrats.

It’s only fair we get our turn in the White House. We can’t help it if there’s a bunch of ignorant people that vote for librul Democrats all the time. And since it don’t look like we’ll ever win the White House again under the old system we need to try something new.

Have a good Friday everybody.

Jay

January 25th, 2013
8:45 am

Skipper, that’s absolutely true. Those Dem-drawn maps were ridiculous. I’ll give Georgia Republicans credit for not repeating that mistake.

stands for decibels

January 25th, 2013
8:46 am

[Y]ou could make a strong argument that by using gerrymandered districts to allocate presidential votes, you are giving far more weight to the votes of certain citizens than to others, thus running afoul of the concept of one-person, one-vote.

But again, it should never come down to that.

Agreed. But, that’d be another manner in which this could be fought head on, that’d would require a lot less time, effort and expense (potentially) than what I’d imagined as alternatives, which are extremely difficult to achieve.

Lord Help Us

January 25th, 2013
8:46 am

Imagine if you will…for just a moment.

Imagine if Debbie Shultz (sp?), after losing a number of elections, decided the Dem states needed to change the laws to give Dems better chances to be elected…

Wingnuts would be apocalyptic…

stands for decibels

January 25th, 2013
8:48 am

I know it’s not going to happen but the BEST thing would be to do away with the electoral college all together and just go by the popular vote.

obviously I agree. But it could happen, in fact, some day, it will.

Any insight as to how we could convince a sufficient supermajority of states to sign on and amend the constitution thus?

Not a snarky question, I really do want to think of ways to make that case as clearly and simply as possible.

TaxPayer

January 25th, 2013
8:48 am

“angry, old, misogynist white racists”?……. Certainly, you can come up with something more descriptive than that.

Actually I did, kayaker: “…lying, thieving, angry old misogynist white racists…”

too little time

January 25th, 2013
8:48 am

Second fully demonstrates it is really a Southern redneck problem (if Wyoming Alaska and Montana are indeed Southern). Please Charlie Rangel come save us from ourselves- we just a bunch of retards down here in the po’ south

1. Wyoming – 59.7%
2. Alaska – 57.8%
3. Montana – 57.7%
4. South Dakota – 56.6%
5. West Virginia – 55.4%
6. Mississippi – 55.3%
6. Idaho – 55.3%
6. Arkansas – 55.3%
9. Alabama – 51.7%
10. North Dakota – 50.7%

More like: if Wyoming , Alaska . Montana . South Dakota . West Virginia , Idaho , North Dakota are Southern.
This is a rural vs. urban split more than a north/south or Dem/Republican split. Charlie Rangel is an idiot.

Yo

January 25th, 2013
8:50 am

Whatever makes Bookman angry is a good thing.

Fred ™

January 25th, 2013
8:52 am

Jay

January 25th, 2013
8:30 am

TaxPayer, I did expect better. I am honestly shocked that this has gotten as far as it has.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Wow, you truly ARE an idealist Jay. I would have thought you would have a little more cynicism after doing this for so many years. As a former Republican, this doesn’t surprise me at all. Unlike what they USED to be, today’s Republicans are a bunch of lying thieving, immoral, scum bags with out a shred of honor or character.

Just look at the ones who post here……… there is no lie or position too despicable for them to parrot or support if Rush or FOX tell it to them…….. Tarvon Martin Martin deserved to be shot, Chip Rogers deserves that 150G a year made up job…….. Sandra fluke is a slut………

This list is endless.

barking frog

January 25th, 2013
8:52 am

The problem is the national focus on the Presidency as ‘the government’
when he can only carry out the law created by Congress with some influence
on initiating some laws. With both parties doing ‘whatever it takes’ to win
the White House, the good of the country has been cast aside. The recent
elections where the Presidential candidates concentrate only on winning a
few states with many electoral votes is not a good thing. Gerrymandering is
not new and is practiced by both parties. Awarding electoral votes by
Congressional Districts could easily backfire for Republicans and benefit
Democrats in future elections. As long as the law is followed the law can be
changed. If illegal, prosecution should be commenced.

Jay

January 25th, 2013
8:53 am

To Southpaw and Jeff T:

Yes, Nebraska and Maine do it differently, and have done so for decades. In neither case was it adopted as a means of subverting the popular will, as is clearly the case here.

In addition, the congressional maps of both states show little or no sign of gerrymandering.

Nebraska: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/NE

Maine: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/ME

woodstockmimi

January 25th, 2013
8:53 am

kayaker71–”….who don’t make excuses for their failures”? Right.

Here are some of the excuses republicans/tpartiers used when they lost the presidential election:

–it was those takers

–it was the 47%

–it was the “urban” voters

–it was Hurricane Sandy

–it was the Black Panthers

And, I am so tired of people like you with your sanctimonious attitude that republicans/tpartiers are the only ones in this country who work or take personal responsibility. Do some research, for heaven’s sake. If you look at the 47% figure, you would find that:

* 28.3% are working and have payroll taxes deducted from their pay checks,

* 10.3% pay no taxes because they are retired and living on social security benefits they paid for throughout their working lives,

*6.9% earn less than $20,000 annually, and

*thousands of soldiers in combat zones are exempt from income taxes.

The 47% figure is meant to deceive American voters that 47% of people are on welfare, which is NOT true. About 2% of people are on welfare; the rest of the 47% is explained above.

And…yes, I am part of that 47%. I am retired after working and paying taxes all of my adult life (actually since I was 15 years old). Plus, I will pay taxes this year on my income because I have taken some money out of my retirement account to buy a house.

So get over yourself and quit making excuses and repeating lies for the republicans/tpartiers.

indigo

January 25th, 2013
8:54 am

Skipper

If Republicans continue this, there’s nothing to stop states with Democratic majorities from doing the same thing.

LIBERAL Progressive and damn proud of it.

January 25th, 2013
8:54 am

The tactic is new, but the intent is typical. As long as republicans can hang on to power in the states through gerrymandering, I doubt there is anything that might stop their antics. On the federal level we have a majority leader in the Senate who has zero back bone. Between republicans with no morals and democrats with no back bone the rest of us are left to twist in the wind. My optimism is beginning to wane.

kayaker 71

January 25th, 2013
8:54 am

Actually, the most descriptive application of gerrymandering was illustrated when an Obama voter exited the polls after voting for Bozo and was asked what he thought of gerrymandering. He replied, ” Gerry Mandering?….. that dude be a great guy”?

Fred ™

January 25th, 2013
8:54 am

F. Sinkwich

January 25th, 2013
8:41 am

Is anything here against the law?

Or does this action just hurt the lib ilk feelings?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I submit example 1 of my characterization of Republicans in my 8:52 post………….

indigo

January 25th, 2013
8:55 am

Liberal – 8:54

In time your optimism, like mine, will be gone with the wind.

Greeter

January 25th, 2013
8:56 am

This sounds “exactly” what the Democratic Governor in Maryland did to the areas of Maryland that DID NOT support him in his last election. The Democrat O’Malley (D-MD) also admitted bribing the Unions for their support and paying back the Unions by FORCING STATE EMPLOYEES to pay Union FeesHe diluted the Republican vote by “redistricting”. He took “heavily Populated Democratic Counties and put them with “sparsely populated” Republican Counties hundreds of miles apart to dilute the Republican vote. O’Bama did the same thing with his “get Out the Vote Groups” like ACORN who actually registered non-existent voters as Democrats and then actually voted using their names. O’Bama also gave them Federal Tax dollars to try and finance the ACORD Organization and their groups.

LIBERAL Progressive and damn proud of it.

January 25th, 2013
8:56 am

Bravo, Woodstock!

Melanie

January 25th, 2013
8:56 am

Is it true that Nebraska and Maine each have a nonpartisan committee equally divided between Republican and Democrat members to draw up the congressional districts? It is not perfect but does prevent the blatant gerrymandering that we see in Virginia, Georgia and under states. Until Virginia and these other Republican-controlled states adopt a similar nonpartisan system, using Nebraska and Maine to justify these “new” changes is a dishonest, red-herring.

Greeter

January 25th, 2013
8:57 am

Taxpayer — now the Black race will have to support themselves. They will get NO support from other races.

stands for decibels

January 25th, 2013
8:58 am

Imagine if Debbie Shultz (sp?), after losing a number of elections, decided the Dem states needed to change the laws

but that’s not really the analogy.

What you’d have to imagine is what actually happened, only it was a situation when a census-year mid-term gave *Democrats* a chance to grab state legislative majorities in very narrowly-held *Republican*-leaning states, and they decided to rig the EC thus.

And of course GOPers would be apoplectic, and they’d be justified in being so.

Thankfully the next census will be during a general election, with presumably major-league turnout, but that is a mighty long time to get this crap sorted out absent extraordinary methods.

Morality?

January 25th, 2013
8:58 am

GOP GOP GOP GOP – That’s all Jay has on his little mind. Why the obsession Jay? The democrats rules every thing these days so when are you going to attack the democrat party for the wrongs they have committed and are committed daily? The laws they are ignoring to up hold – the unconstitutional appointments Obama is making without the approval of /Congress? YES – JAY IS A PARTY LOYALIST. By the way Jay the democrats have done more than their share of gerrymandering in their time – just what look at what they did under KING ROY BARNES. Now lemmings like you are members of the CULT of Obama.

mbtc

January 25th, 2013
8:58 am

All this while screaming what a tyrant President Obama is. Actually, as has been reported, gerrymandering has already thrown the House to the minority republicans. This is just the natural progression. This must be stopped. If rolls were reversed no doubt “second ammendment” solutions would be forthcoming.

ATL Tiger

January 25th, 2013
8:58 am

Jay is basically saying,
“God forbid any state do something differently than what we’re currently doing.”

Since Maine and Nebraska already have that system in place, and no legal action has said that its unconstitutional, how is it cheating again?

Dumb and Dumber

January 25th, 2013
8:58 am

Awarding electoral votes by congressional district is not new, Nebraska has done this for years. No one cried when President Obama carried the district including Omaha in 2008 and was awarded one electoral vote. So Mitt Romney won 7 of the 11 congressional districts in Virginia.(I assume he is then awarded the two electoral votes for the Senate seats based on winning a majority of the congressional districts) and gets 9. Not exactly groundbreaking, perhaps a bit clever.
Funny, people have railed on the electoral college for years about how their individual vote doesn’t count, hate the distortion of the winner take all system, etc. Someone tries to do things a bit more proportionally and someone doesn’t like that either (because now President Obama would lose electoral votes in this instance rather than gain in 2008). Flip the parties around in VA and you wouldn’t even consider this newsworthy.

DannyX

January 25th, 2013
8:58 am

“Had the bill been law in November, Barack Obama would have been awarded just four of the state’s 13 electoral votes, even though he carried the state.”

This is the system our Republican defenders want??? Really? The deflectors are screaming their usual nonsense, but when it comes right down to it do you deflectors really want a system that would allocate just 4 of 13 electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote? If you do you have lost all credibility, (as if you had any to begin with.)

Republican crazy, still going strong.

Thulsa Doom

January 25th, 2013
8:58 am

Under a bill passed out of a state Senate subcommittee this week, Virginia would no longer award its electoral votes to the candidate who won the most votes. Instead, the state’s electoral votes would be allocated by congressional district, which are heavily gerrymandered to favor the GOP.*

So.

Jay

January 25th, 2013
8:59 am

“If Republicans continue this, there’s nothing to stop states with Democratic majorities from doing the same thing.”

Yes, there is. There are few if any states that voted for Romney but have legislatures controlled by Democrats, which is what this scheme requires.

I would also hope that Democrats have some remaining sense of shame.

DannyX

January 25th, 2013
9:01 am

Maine and Nebraska also have at large electoral votes that go to the winner of the popular vote, the Virginia plan doesn’t.

[...] link: GOP battle plan: If you can’t compete, cheat – Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog) Share [...]

Thulsa Doom

January 25th, 2013
9:01 am

“Since Maine and Nebraska already have that system in place, and no legal action has said that its unconstitutional, how is it cheating again?”

Because its different. It just is say the Dims.

Conservative Christian

January 25th, 2013
9:01 am

Poor Jay. Calling this cheating while completely ignoring the rampant voter fraud going on in heavily dem districts. How is it possible that more people vote than are registered in a district? Its happens in many dem area’s… Don’t you libs want the minority(tax payers) to have a voice?

JamVet

January 25th, 2013
9:01 am

Neocon desperation. I love it. These are indeed terrible times for the Potted Plant Party.

Sure, they will try their shenanigans to keep from getting crushed every fourth November, but they have a MUCH bigger problem than congressional districts.

Their racist, fascist ideology of yesteryear is a complete loser and their representatives and base bereft of moral courage

THAT is why they will continue to get humiliated like they did this past November 6th.

Just ask Alan West, Joe Walsh, Todd Aiken, Richard Mourdoch and George “Macaca” Allen…

Paul

January 25th, 2013
9:02 am

Seems like another example of short-attention span theater.

How many times have we seen one party put through a stunt like this to gain an advantage? Then time passes, the political landscape drastically changes and what one party did to stick it to the other party now results in and advantage to the past underdog and the creators getting stuck?

Jay

January 25th, 2013
9:02 am

Thulsa, you disappoint me.

You support a system that would give the leading vote-getter in a state just one third of its electoral votes, while the loser gets two-thirds?

I guess I really am naive…. Amazing.

Keep Up the Good Fight!

January 25th, 2013
9:02 am

Someone tries to do things a bit more proportionally and someone doesn’t like that either

Well now, then why are they not addressing this in red states like Georgia and not just blue states or purple states? Or just support an amendment to remove the EC completely?

Oh wait… because there is a different agenda

St Simons

January 25th, 2013
9:02 am

Two “mikey does it tooooo” posts, and a random off topic gun nut post.
They’re not even trying any more.

man, I admire you, but there you go again (I know, I do it too)
trying to shame them into some sort of civilized behavior.

but as mrsstsimons finally learned about 5 yrs into her career –
you can’t shame sociopaths into acting right. They don’t have that chip.
They just don’t have it.

The only good news about this is They will be gone before 2020.
…that and Parker’s General Store on de island started carrying
Mayfield milk (yum), and we have a gallon in our fridge,

Paul

January 25th, 2013
9:04 am

Conservative C

“the rampant voter fraud going on in heavily dem districts. ”

I know I’m wasting my time, but… cites?

And what criminal charges have been brought by local or state or federal authorities?

Marty Huggins'

January 25th, 2013
9:05 am

Was it “cheating” when Massachusetts used the congressional district method in the elections of 1804-1820 and then as Maine seceded to form its own state and continue the practice for another 8 years?

Was it also cheating as Maine once again returned to the congressional district method in response to the Nixon-Humphrey-Wallace race by enacting very similar measures in a law passed in ‘69 but not used until ‘72?

Possibly Jay as you recommend republicans do…..” But rather than work harder to win back the state, or adopt policies more relevant to the needs of its voters”

Democrats could work harder to win those votes in said congressional districts or adopt policies more relevant to the voters in those districts?

We are not nor have we ever been a popular vote democracy. We use electoral college, it is what it is and it is for the states to decide what system the use to cast those votes.

Jay

January 25th, 2013
9:05 am

“Someone tries to do things a bit more proportionally and someone doesn’t like that either.”

Right. Take a look at what Preibus said again:

“I think it’s something that a lot of states that have been consistently blue that are fully controlled red ought to be looking at.”

Furthermore, two-thirds of the electoral votes for the loser, and less than one-third for the winner, meets no test of proportionality.

Seriously, people. You tarnish yourself by attempting to defend the clearly indefensible. This is about dismantling the basic architecture of self-government.

DannyX

January 25th, 2013
9:05 am

“Poor Jay. Calling this cheating while completely ignoring the rampant voter fraud going on in heavily dem districts.”

When all else fails dazzle them with Republican crazy.

Thulsa Doom

January 25th, 2013
9:06 am

“Yes, Nebraska and Maine do it differently, and have done so for decades. In neither case was it adopted as a means of subverting the popular will, as is clearly the case here.”

Aaaah. Now we get to the crux of the matter. So what’s important is one party or one man’s “opinion” about the “intent” of why they are doing it and that’s what makes it wrong. Interesting.

Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)

January 25th, 2013
9:07 am

Thulsa, you disappoint me.

Well, he’s always disappointed me, but glad to see Bookman’s coming around.

JamVet

January 25th, 2013
9:07 am

There is never a time – morning, noon or night – that cc, the inveterate liar, cannot and will not pull something right out of his ___!

Fred ™

January 25th, 2013
9:08 am

Conservative Christian

January 25th, 2013
9:01 am

Poor Jay. Calling this cheating while completely ignoring the rampant voter fraud going on in heavily dem districts.
++++++++++++++++++++++

Could you provide proof please.

Oh and Jay? Have you seen a post from your Republican friends here yet that even BEGINS to refute (even by example) that I was wrong?

Nope.

Did you just watch Pollyanna?

http://www.youtube.com/movie?v=Pn5rShDpL6o&feature=mv_sr

DannyX

January 25th, 2013
9:08 am

What red states that Romney carried are planning to change their electoral vote allocation system?

Morality?

January 25th, 2013
9:09 am

You of low intellect – there will be no change in the 2nd amendment. 1st of all 2/3rds of the HOUSE and SENATE would have to vote for a change – no chance. That would be an INSTANT death sentence for their beloved political future. 2nd of all 3/4th, yes 3/4th of the states would have to agree with any changes and that won’t happen. So dream on in your dreary little world but changing the Constitution or making an amendment to it won’t happen – as it should be. Instead Obama will unconstitutionally and illegally try to do it by executive order – an impeachable offense except that he and his mafia cult are in charge. democrats INVENTED gerrymandering and KING ROY BARNES was famous for it. Quit whining about the Repubs doing the same ’cause the Dems were good at it 1st. Dems have done plenty of cheating themselves… politicians are liars – they cheat for a living and people like you keep them in office. TERM LIMITS for Congress.

Jefferson

January 25th, 2013
9:09 am

Reasonable people can come to reasonable conclusions under reasonable conditions unless you are a republican.

Paul

January 25th, 2013
9:09 am

Doesn’t this conflict with Republican ideology? The winner has to give his earnings to the loser? The loser expects the winners to carry him and make it all better? Encourages a climate of dependency? Encourages life-long ‘looserness’?

Man, what an admission… “I can’t make it in life, I can’t compete in a free-market system, so I want the rules changed so even if I come in second or third or fourth in each decathlon event I’ll still get the crown at the end.’

And cons complain about giving awards for participating. Sheesh…..

DownInAlbany

January 25th, 2013
9:09 am

I’m not advocating what is going on in VA, but, wouldn’t this approach benefit the dems sometimes, the pubs others? Both sides have railed against the electoral college from time to time, according to how it would benefit them at the time. This is considered “news” only becaus the dirty rotten pubs are attempting it. Why just go to the popular vote? Then we might see attention paid to the rest of us, not just the swing states.

Women in the military, gun control, gay rights, and a twice elected african american in the WH. 20 years ago, who would have expected these things? These times, they are a-changing…

Fly-On-The-Wall

January 25th, 2013
9:10 am

This is what Karl Rove meant by a ‘permanent majority’ but instead it is a permanent minority over the majority. Isn’t this how a lot of the Arab countries from the Arab Spring were run? Figures that the Repubs would want to go this route since they found a good role model in middle eastern dictators.

mm

January 25th, 2013
9:10 am

“How about hard working, self reliant, responsible patriots who don’t make excuses for their failures.”

How about lazy, faux patriots that always blame others for their failures.

DownInAlbany

January 25th, 2013
9:11 am

Gerrymandering? Take a look at how CD2 is constantly arranged to keep Sanford Bishop (D) in office…by, GASP!, the pubs!

mbtc

January 25th, 2013
9:11 am

If you, Christian Conservative, were hauled into court for being a Christian, what evidence would be used against you?

Jefferson

January 25th, 2013
9:11 am

The GOP track record is horrible, why does anyone thing they have changed?

Jay

January 25th, 2013
9:12 am

Fred, I am forced to agree.

Thulsa Doom

January 25th, 2013
9:12 am

“Thulsa, you disappoint me.”

States rights Jay. As for your point about gerrymandering come on now. Both parties have been doing gerrymandering for a long time. You ought to know better than that.

YouLibs

January 25th, 2013
9:12 am

Ever notice that if you drop the vowels from Priebus’s name you end up with RNC pr bs?

alittlecommonsense

January 25th, 2013
9:13 am

“Yes, there is. There are few if any states that voted for Romney but have legislatures controlled by Democrats, which is what this scheme requires.”

So if the Democrats are so dominant as you keep trying to tell us, then why is this? And why are 30 Governorships held by Republicans? Maybe the Republican party isn’t quite as dead as you want us to think?

I guess if the Democrats weren’t so out of touch with the population, they could compete at the state levels as well as the national level huh?

Thomas

January 25th, 2013
9:14 am

Yes, Nebraska and Maine do it differently, and have done so for decades. In neither case was it adopted as a means of subverting the popular will, as is clearly the case here.

Jay Birds way of not saying “oops- someone caught me”. Note the absence of “Good point. I should have pointed out those facts in the original blog.”

#1 rule of sloppy media- never admit you are sloppy media #2 rule of sloppy media- make sure your followers are blindly loyal

barking frog

January 25th, 2013
9:15 am

I wonder why this method was instituted ? Is it a ‘poison pill’ to allow the
country to self destruct? I think not.

Paul

January 25th, 2013
9:16 am

Morality?

“You of low intellect – there will be no change in the 2nd amendment.”

FO-CUS.

Or go back to bed -

Jay

January 25th, 2013
9:16 am

I honestly thought that few conservatives on this blog would try to defend this.

Not a pleasant lesson to be taught otherwise.

TGT

January 25th, 2013
9:16 am

You libs do realize that states (Maine and Nebraska) already use this “congressional district method” of awarding their electoral votes, right?

Jay says “States are within their rights under the Constitution to allocate electoral votes as they wish, so a legal challenge on that basis would fail.”

So Jay admits that it’s constitutional and legal to make such a change, yet this is somehow “cheating?”

JamVet

January 25th, 2013
9:17 am

As for the Cornhusker state, it has a unicameral. Among the fifty states, it is unique.

Those racist Republican pigs in Macacaland (Virginia) are not in any way on par with Nebraskans. Republicans, Democrats or whatever.

Slavery-free Nebraska men helped killed those Virginia traitors a hundred and fifty years ago. And we were damn good at it. By the end of the Civil War, more than a third (3,157) of the men of military age in the Nebraska Territory had served in the Union army.

Like I said, it really doesn’t matter much.

Like rubella, the neocon disease is in grave danger of being eradicated in this country…